July 24, 2014, 05:38:59 PM

Author Topic: Voyeurism  (Read 1865 times)

dancook

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
Voyeurism
« on: March 14, 2014, 11:28:12 AM »
I was reading some threads, one post which suggested anything over 50mm was not street photography - it was voyeurism. Albeit, tongue in cheek - but some people seem to be really opinionated about focal lengths.

I have only recently started to try my hand at 'street photography' or 'voyeurism'. Using a 5dm3, I felt most comfortable with my 135L (The 85mm is a bit slow in gaining focus). I did try to go back to my 35mm - but instantly felt lost. I would probably need more time with it, change my thinking, but I enjoyed having a good radius to with the 135mm.

My 5dm3 is gripped and my 35mm is the same size as my 135mm! So it's rather conspicuous. I've been saving up for a 200mm (white beast) - and whilst I might go back to the 135mm, I'm very interested in giving it a go on the street!



First of all the gentleman on the right took my interest, reminded me of Gene Wilder (although I first thought Eric Idle.. I get confused by those two) - maybe the little girl was trying to figure it out herself.


Curious Girl by dancook1982, on Flickr


This gentleman in Covent gardens, who's reflection appears on the shoulders of the mannequin


Spiffy Reflection by dancook1982, on Flickr


FQ2A8874 by dancook1982, on Flickr


Papped by dancook1982, on Flickr


Feeling Blue by dancook1982, on Flickr


Taking in the sights by dancook1982, on Flickr


Sunset walk by dancook1982, on Flickr


Don't be stingy by dancook1982, on Flickr

The following are more portrait, but I found them to be interesting people


Coolest of the Cool by dancook1982, on Flickr


Making a statement by dancook1982, on Flickr


Model Quality by dancook1982, on Flickr

canon rumors FORUM

Voyeurism
« on: March 14, 2014, 11:28:12 AM »

candyman

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1065
  • The best critic sits in front of the camera
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2014, 12:03:45 PM »
The 135mL is an excellent lens for street photography. And, not so strong presence unlike the white beast (200)


Some great shots you did here!
Thanks for sharing

5DIII w/grip  |  6D  |  16-35L IS  |  24-70VC  |  24-105L  |  70-200 f/2.8L IS II  |  70-300L  |  35 f/2 IS  |  50A  |  135L

Click

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2561
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2014, 12:57:21 PM »
Very nice series. Welcome to cr  :)

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2057
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2014, 01:56:21 PM »
I didn't see the other thread but the thing I find detached from using the longer focal lengths is, the detached feeling! There is no communication with the subject so you are just framing juxtapositions, it is far more difficult to get a compelling image from mere juxtaposition.

Having said that I am all in favour of more photographers and fewer theorists on the forum so welcome  :)
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

Stig

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 134
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2014, 03:32:14 PM »
some really nice and interesting pictures  :)

I got my 135L last September while on vacation in NY and in the evening I was walking through Times square with it. Originaly just some test shots and my first small street photo attempt turned into one of my best and most interesting photo experiences, I got some pictures I really like, and the lens even surpassed my expectations, I really like it (and CR made me look at it more in the first place, so thanks guys for that  ;) ).
6D,   350D,  24-105 f4,   50 f1.8, 135mm f2, 14mm f2.8, Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6,   430EX II,   Godox TT520,   etc...

dancook

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2014, 04:09:26 PM »
Thanks all,

Until I started getting into street photography (a couple of weeks ago!) I was starting to get concerned about the lack of use my 135L gets - I'm glad it has now found it's place!

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1681
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2014, 05:39:14 PM »
I enjoyed these pictures; I think Spiffy Reflection and Feeling Blue are top notch.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2014, 05:39:14 PM »

distant.star

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1426
    • View Profile
    • Tracy's Shooting Gallery
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #7 on: March 14, 2014, 08:57:10 PM »
I was reading some threads, one post which suggested anything over 50mm was not street photography - it was voyeurism. Albeit, tongue in cheek - but some people seem to be really opinionated about focal lengths.

I have only recently started to try my hand at 'street photography' or 'voyeurism'. Using a 5dm3, I felt most comfortable with my 135L (The 85mm is a bit slow in gaining focus). I did try to go back to my 35mm - but instantly felt lost. I would probably need more time with it, change my thinking, but I enjoyed having a good radius to with the 135mm.

Thanks, I really like your work. You've got a great eye for this, and I'm amazed that you've only been at it a few weeks.

I suggest you believe very little of what you read about "street photography." It's become a term that means something different to everyone, hence it really means nothing. Scads of people who've never taken a picture of someone they don't know will beat you down about how they think it's supposed to be. And many of the so called masters of the "genre" basically stink. I've been doing what I call "public photography" for many years, and my best advice is to define yourself. Understand what it is you want to show through your images and pick your equipment based on that. If what you're doing satisfies you and fulfills your vision, the rest of them can piss off.

The Canon 135mm and the Sigma 35mm are my two preferred lenses on a 5D3; back in the film era I mostly used a 50mm. In my experience the 35mm gets me close enough to show an impression of what's going on (human interactions, typically), and the 135mm I use more for candid portraits. Sometimes in crowded places I'll use a 17-40 and not even raise it to my eye -- just point and shoot (and crop when needed). Since I'm using the 35mm so much nowadays, I'm probably going to get a Fujifilm X100S this spring; it seems to deliver great IQ and it's far less obtrusive. Then I can keep the 135mm on the 5D3 and be ready for anything.

Thanks again for showing your fine work. I'll hope to see more.
Walter: Were you listening to The Dude's story? Donny: I was bowling. Walter: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

dancook

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #8 on: March 15, 2014, 05:34:18 AM »
Thanks a lot.

I was starting to think about another body, but it might just be GAS.

My 35mm is the Carl Zeiss 35mm 1.4 distagon - and I'm afraid to let it go for the Sig. I got thinking about the Sony A7R which I believe would give me a little help with manual focus lenses. Since I've got a wedding later in the year, I was trying to justify the second body would be handy..

When I popped the 35mm on, I tried to hipshoot - my wife sarcastically said 'smooth'.. not using a strap, so holding it facing forward lower down the body can be quite awkward.

Well whatever category my photos fall under, I was elated for having taken them - so that's what counts :)

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1681
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2014, 05:44:37 AM »
If you're going to get a second body and you're serious then get the same as you have now. This means that you can have different lenses on different bodies: the most common in weddings 24-70 + 70-200 for instance.

dancook

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #10 on: March 15, 2014, 07:21:32 AM »
If you're going to get a second body and you're serious then get the same as you have now. This means that you can have different lenses on different bodies: the most common in weddings 24-70 + 70-200 for instance.

thanks, it would mean I can use my flash equipment with the Canon too - so in that way makes sense.

Lenses wise, I have 35mm 1.4, 85mm 1.2, 135mm 2, and saving up for the 200 2 - I know people rave about zooms for weddings, but I hope I can manage with my primes

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1681
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #11 on: March 15, 2014, 10:08:31 AM »
Primes are fine, but I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 50 mm focal length.

candyman

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1065
  • The best critic sits in front of the camera
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #12 on: March 15, 2014, 10:12:55 AM »
Primes are fine, but I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 50 mm focal length.


Hi Sporgon,
I love to hear why? I am currently looking for adding 50 or 85mm and like to hear your arguments.

5DIII w/grip  |  6D  |  16-35L IS  |  24-70VC  |  24-105L  |  70-200 f/2.8L IS II  |  70-300L  |  35 f/2 IS  |  50A  |  135L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #12 on: March 15, 2014, 10:12:55 AM »

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1681
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #13 on: March 15, 2014, 01:48:58 PM »
Primes are fine, but I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 50 mm focal length.


Hi Sporgon,
I love to hear why? I am currently looking for adding 50 or 85mm and like to hear your arguments.

Space, distance and perspective are my reasons for this. 85mm gives a pleasant perspective but you need to be able to get far enough away. You also need more light one way or another to keep more depth of field. 35mm will result in an undesired perspective when used close; to reduce depth of field you're going to be very close = undesired perspective. In these situations the 50mm (on FF) gives you a pleasant, neutral perspective even when close, and you have good control over depth of field. That's why I say I wouldn't like to shoot a wedding without access to the 50mm focal length.

I don't know what you shoot or your style but I see you have the 135 so if deciding between a 50 and 85 prime, I'd go for the 50. You hear people say it's a 'boring' focal length because it doesn't give an exaggerated perspective either side of neutral, but I have found that relying on extreme perspective to make a picture good is a mistake.

candyman

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1065
  • The best critic sits in front of the camera
    • View Profile
Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2014, 02:01:21 PM »
Primes are fine, but I wouldn't want to shoot a wedding without a 50 mm focal length.


Hi Sporgon,
I love to hear why? I am currently looking for adding 50 or 85mm and like to hear your arguments.

Space, distance and perspective are my reasons for this. 85mm gives a pleasant perspective but you need to be able to get far enough away. You also need more light one way or another to keep more depth of field. 35mm will result in an undesired perspective when used close; to reduce depth of field you're going to be very close = undesired perspective. In these situations the 50mm (on FF) gives you a pleasant, neutral perspective even when close, and you have good control over depth of field. That's why I say I wouldn't like to shoot a wedding without access to the 50mm focal length.

I don't know what you shoot or your style but I see you have the 135 so if deciding between a 50 and 85 prime, I'd go for the 50. You hear people say it's a 'boring' focal length because it doesn't give an exaggerated perspective either side of neutral, but I have found that relying on extreme perspective to make a picture good is a mistake.


Thanks for taking the time to write down your agurments. I appreciate it


I thought that when using the 50mm it would be too much stepping into the comfort zone of people. I used to own the sigma 50mm f/1.4 and used it on the crop (7D). I felt not comfortable with the 50mm on FF (besides the fact that the quality on the FF was less than on the 7D)

I think I must rent a 50mm (Canon or Sigma) and try it again.

5DIII w/grip  |  6D  |  16-35L IS  |  24-70VC  |  24-105L  |  70-200 f/2.8L IS II  |  70-300L  |  35 f/2 IS  |  50A  |  135L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Voyeurism
« Reply #14 on: March 15, 2014, 02:01:21 PM »